Brahman

[Gummuluru Murthy]

On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:

> On Thu, 5 Feb 1998, Charles Wikner wrote:
>
>
> > In his commentary on Brahma Suutra 1.1.1, "Sankara says:
> >
> >       ... Brahman does exist as a well-known entity -- eternal, pure,
> >       intelligent, free by nature, and all-knowing and all-powerful.
> >       For from the very derivation of the word Brahman, the ideas of
> >       eternality, purity, etc. become obvious, this being in accord
> >       with the root b.r.mh.
> >
>
> This is very important.  Sometimes people on this list placing undue
> emphasis on texts such as "neti neti" seem to suggest that Brahman is
> something that is unknowable and indescribable.  Certainly Vedanta
> says Brahman is difficult to know but it is hardly a "void" as this
> passage shows.
>
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
>

Namaste. The comment is well taken. Is Brahman describable ? If so, how,
except in neti, neti form ? I agree with the latter part of the comment
that Brahman is certainly not a void. I would also seek clarification
on what Charles wrote, quoting Shri Shankara that Brahman is a well-known
                                                               ^^^^^^^^^^
entity. I see it at the other extreme - very hard to comprehend -
guhAdguhyam - most secretive.

Regards
Gummuluru Murthy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yadaa sarve pramucyante kaamaa ye'sya hr^di shritaah
atha martyo'mr^to bhavatyatra brahma samashnute   Katha Upanishhad II.3.14

When all the desires that dwell in the heart fall away, then the mortal
becomes immortal, and attains Brahman even here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------